Fishing with Rod Discussion Forum

Fishing in British Columbia => General Discussion => Topic started by: RalphH on November 07, 2020, 03:09:50 PM

Title: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: RalphH on November 07, 2020, 03:09:50 PM
for a two week period:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/b-c-announces-new-restrictions-for-metro-vancouver-health-regions-for-2-weeks-as-cases-surge-1.5793969
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: wildmanyeah on November 07, 2020, 03:25:26 PM
It’s a nothing burger, I’ll continue to go to work as usual, send my kids to school as usual and have the few people I normally have over as usual

There trying to get the case count down before everyone starts to travel around the province for Christmas
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: poper on November 07, 2020, 05:07:14 PM
They said 2 weeks when Covid first hit us, this will be on way after Christmas is my guess.
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: clarki on November 07, 2020, 06:24:20 PM
I’ll continue to...have the few people I normally have over as usual
Then you would be violating a PHO order and breaking the law then, wouldn’t you?
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: Dubs604 on November 07, 2020, 06:29:43 PM
Yeah this sucks. I’ve been leaning on my folks to watch the little one while I work from home. Looks like I’ll be trying to balance child care and work again like the early days of the pandemic.  :(

I don’t blame Dr. Henry for taking this action. Our numbers are way out of control right now. Only a matter of time before our health care system would be equally out of control.
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: Knnn on November 07, 2020, 09:52:56 PM
How tragic.  Science and reasoning has left the room.

There is now overwhelming and irrefutable evidence that lock downs do little or no good and when the societal impacts are measured the cure causes far more harm than the disease.

There is no second wave.  Well not anything different than what happens every year at this time of year.  The pandemic is over, all we are seeing now is the normal seasonal endemic increase in case numbers that occurs with all respiratory viruses. 

One look at the fatality ratio seen in Sweden tells all.  While the case numbers are climbing (not exponentially as in a pandemic, but following a normal endemic increase) the deaths are relatively small, see below:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_eJuj0rx-48

This is in a country that has never had a lock down.

The risk of our health care system spiraling out of control is now very small.  It's telling that all we hear about is increasing case numbers but not the ICU or fatality ratio.

The risk that more people will die from lack of prompt medical attention, not getting their chemo on time, not going to emergency with chest pains  or committing suicide is likely to be higher than COVID deaths.





Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: Fish Assassin on November 07, 2020, 10:20:32 PM
^^^

The pandemic is over ?? Really ?? Has Donald Trump moved to Canada ? We're rounding the curve................ blah, blah, blah
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: wildmanyeah on November 07, 2020, 10:53:04 PM
Yeah this sucks. I’ve been leaning on my folks to watch the little one while I work from home. Looks like I’ll be trying to balance child care and work again like the early days of the pandemic.  :(

I don’t blame Dr. Henry for taking this action. Our numbers are way out of control right now. Only a matter of time before our health care system would be equally out of control.

Your parents are exempt if they are your care givers for your children
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: wildmanyeah on November 07, 2020, 11:03:04 PM
They said 2 weeks when Covid first hit us, this will be on way after Christmas is my guess.

Will have stricter measures by Christmas as this will do F all. Bonny said she don’t believe ive in regional orders and used the Kelona outbreak as An example. These orders or to satisfy the Fraser health public health officers.
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: RalphH on November 08, 2020, 11:26:36 AM
How tragic.  Science and reasoning has left the room.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_eJuj0rx-48

This is in a country that has never had a lock down.



Sweden has  2x more covid cases per capita , than Canada.

Sweden  - about 11.46 cases per thousand

Canada - about 6 cases per thousand

Sweden has a lower death rate per capita but the death rate per infections is about the same (4%)
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: Roderick on November 08, 2020, 12:56:19 PM
You lost me there Ralph...

Sweden 11.46 X 0.04 = 0.4584 deaths per thousand

Canada 6 X 0.04 = 0.24 deaths per thousand

Your statement "Sweden has a lower death rate per capita" is false if your other statement, "the death rate per infections is about the same (4%)", is true.   
Or it could be the other way around of course... but both your statements can't be true if your numbers are correct. 
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: Roderick on November 08, 2020, 01:36:17 PM
Did a little number crunching from the internet. (November 8th, 2020)

Sweden  1450 cases and ~60 deaths per 100k (and 4.1% death rate per case)
Canada 697 cases and ~27 deaths per 100k  (and 4% death rate per case)
BC 347 cases and  ~5.4 deaths per 100k (and 1.6% death rate per case)
USA 2963 cases and ~71 deaths per 100k (and a 2.4% death rate per cases)

Personally I think we should continue to do what Dr. Bonnie Henry says.

Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: Knnn on November 08, 2020, 02:26:19 PM
^^^
The pandemic is over ?? Really ?? Has Donald Trump moved to Canada ? We're rounding the curve................ blah, blah, blah

Hey FA, yes the exponential growth of a new virus is over, we are now in the endemic phase of the corona virus' life cycle where it establishes a permanent position in infected populations and will follow a normal seasonal variation in respiratory tract infections along with other similar diseases like influenza, etc.  I did not wish to imply that it was over and gone for good.  Just that it does not pose the same uncertain risks as it did during the initial pandemic.  There is no reason to believe it will not follow the same seasonal patterns that have clearly been established by all other similar virus, i.e increase during the winter and decline in the summer.
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: RalphH on November 08, 2020, 02:38:25 PM
almost all the info on line deals with actual infections and deaths and doesn't factor in population. Canada has a population of 37 million and Sweden 10 million.

I looked at these 2 websites:

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/canada/

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/sweden/


If everything is equal between the 2 Canada should have experienced about 4 times the number of infections as Sweden yet the numbers are 146,461 for Sweden vs 263,317 for Canada.

It's not hard to figure out that Sweden's performance is overall in terms of cases per thousand is close to double that of Canada.

Their death rate among those infected is lower possibly because a so many of the cases in the first wave in Canada were among the very old.

Many geographic and cultural factors could explain why different countries have different experiences with covid 19 but overall there is no evidence that the Public health orders used in Canada have not been effective assuming Sweden has not adopted similar approaches to infection control
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: Roderick on November 08, 2020, 03:47:27 PM
Hey FA, yes the exponential growth of a new virus is over

Have you even looked at the numbers? The number of daily new cases continues to trend upwards which is the definition of exponential growth.  Endemic is not a "life cycle phase". it simply means that the virus is present in the population and isn't new or coming from somewhere else. 

There's another word you might be interested in. An epidemic is when an endemic or novel virus starts to grow exponentially, usually in a localized region.  If this then spreads around the world it's called a pandemic.   

Quote

Just that it does not pose the same uncertain risks

lol Ya now we are certain that this virus is airborne and at least 40 times deadlier them influenza. 
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: Knnn on November 08, 2020, 05:13:56 PM
Have you even looked at the numbers? The number of daily new cases continues to trend upwards which is the definition of exponential growth.  Endemic is not a "life cycle phase". it simply means that the virus is present in the population and isn't new or coming from somewhere else. 

There's another word you might be interested in. An epidemic is when an endemic or novel virus starts to grow exponentially, usually in a localized region.  If this then spreads around the world it's called a pandemic. 

While cases have been increasing, there is certainly no exponential growth in cases, which is the quantity growing and an increasing rate of growth.   The number of cases is also impacted by the number of tests and therefore does not provide a metric to assess the risk posed by the virus. 

Please take a look at page 5 of the British Columbia Weekly COVID-19 Surveillance Report updated to October 8:

http://www.bccdc.ca/Health-Info-Site/Documents/BC_Surveillance_Summary_Oct_08_2020_final.pdf

Case numbers, hospitalizations and deaths had all leveled off.  There has been no exponential growth in any of these metrics, even with the huge increase in number of people being tested compared to the earlier in the year.






 
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: RalphH on November 08, 2020, 05:25:32 PM
Exponential growth is the  growth of a bacteria etc by an exponential factor. Each growth factor at least doubles  per generation - 2x to 4x to 8x etc. When graphed they have an exponential curve that can be described by an exponential function such and rise with a growing curve trending towards a 90 degree vertical line.

It is important not to confuse the growth of a bacteria or virus population in a host such as a petrie dish with the growth of infected agents such as the inventory of petrie dishes in a lab.
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: Roderick on November 08, 2020, 05:34:42 PM
Sigh... the very first line of your link says the number of weekly new cases are increasing each week... 846 compared to 647 last week.  If the trend continues in to next week the number of new cases next week would be 1106 and the week after that 1438 and after that 1869 and then 2430 new cases per week etc

At this rate new cases double in less then 3 weeks. 

That's exponential growth... get it?
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: Dubs604 on November 08, 2020, 08:36:55 PM
Your parents are exempt if they are your care givers for your children

You’re right!  Thank you!  It wasn’t clear in the order, but several news outlets have said that it doesn’t apply to child care.
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: sumasriver on November 08, 2020, 08:48:24 PM
You’re right!  Thank you!  It wasn’t clear in the order, but several news outlets have said that it doesn’t apply to child care.


Non household immediate family members can see each other.at home / restaurant / or outdoors....... but not have a gathering.....

Clear as mud.......   
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: clarki on November 08, 2020, 09:27:39 PM
Sigh... the very first line of your link says the number of weekly new cases are increasing each week... 846 compared to 647 last week.  If the trend continues in to next week the number of new cases next week would be 1106 and the week after that 1438 and after that 1869 and then 2430 new cases per week etc

At this rate new cases double in less then 3 weeks. 

That's exponential growth... get it?
Don’t sigh too heavily. Your reasoning is flawed.

You previously stated that an upward trend is the definition of exponential growth.  That’s not so. An upward trend just indicates growth. Could be linear, could be exponential.

Secondly, you can’t just look at a snapshot of two data points (846 and 647) (from a month ago too!) and infer exponential growth. Get it? 😀

The data from late August to mid/late October demonstrates linear growth. Having said that, the growth in weeks 43 and weeks 44 (ending Oct 31) and the daily numbers reported since might indicate exponential growth. Time will tell. Will Dr Bonnie’s measures flatten the curve? Time will tell.
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: Hike_and_fish on November 09, 2020, 07:06:51 AM
Testing seems to be flawed. Has BC finally received these fake test kits ? There are a LOT of people speaking up about faulty test results. My mother is one of them. 62 years old, works in a care home and HAS to be tested regularly. She's received a positive test result on three separate tests. Two of those tests were 14 days apart. The last test was 5 days after the last test. All three positive and no sign of any sickness in her. The local social media is full of people with similar stories. One person talked about not being swabbed and receiving a positive result.
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: bobby b on November 09, 2020, 08:42:09 AM
What is with all the Trump like denials on here. What a bunch of self righteous ignorant louts

BTW...
Hospitalizations ARE up.

I just spent the last half hour trying to console one of my students that had his mother pass away just 5 days after being tested positive and now his older brother is in ICU ....  is that just normal seasonal event!? So tell me was that test flawed Hike and Fish, should his family just ignore test results and listen to you guys pontificating on subjects that you are completely out of you depth on?



Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: Barbelface on November 09, 2020, 09:01:17 AM
I lost my father to Covid Pneumonia back in June. He had two tests while in hospital care (UK), both of which came back negative. All told at least 15 of my family members that live in the North of England have had the virus, two of which (under 40 yr old healthy adults) have lasting long covid symptoms.

My buddy in California lost both his parents within 3 days of each other back in August...

Many people still claim that seasonal influenza kills more people, however in my 49 years on earth I have never personally known anyone who died of seasonal flu...
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: Hike_and_fish on November 09, 2020, 09:02:02 AM
What is with all the Trump like denials on here. What a bunch of self righteous ignorant louts

BTW...
Hospitalizations ARE up.

I just spent the last half hour trying to console one of my students that had his mother pass away just 5 days after being tested positive and now his older brother is in ICU ....  is that just normal seasonal event!? So tell me was that test flawed Hike and Fish, should his family just ignore test results and listen to you guys pontificating on subjects that you are completely out of you depth on?

I'm saying some tests are faulty. Don't lump me into some paranoid conspiracy. I am simply explaining that my family has first hand experience of faulty tests. So pound sand pal and get off my back.
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: bobby b on November 09, 2020, 09:10:20 AM
Your words do nothing but try to sow mistrust... 'Flawed' 'Fake test kits'.  There may very well be some false positives, but the way you state it is just another siren call like ' A lot of people are saying' ... remind you of anyone..

Pound yer own sand
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: RalphH on November 09, 2020, 09:20:49 AM
Barbelface I am very sorry for your loss, both your story and bobby b's show the pain and loss from covid is real and the Public Health Directives are necessary to save lives and reduce suffering. Many people who recover my Covid will have to live reduced lives due to the permanent damage the disease can do.

'False' test results - really results that are erroneous are unavoidable. Most tests are biased to false positives on the assumption that's a better than a false negative. Current covid tests are known and it has been well discussed in public, to yield a relatively high % of false results. People with symptoms but negative swabs are advised to self isolate for 14 days regardless of the result which can be wrong something like 30% of the time IIRC.

BTW I had my own experience with a false positive for cancer. I had unnecessary surgery as a result for what turned out to be benign growths.
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: VAGAbond on November 09, 2020, 09:35:36 AM
Talked to a neighbor acquaintance the other day.  He has lost three siblings to the virus.  All were previously healthy individuals in their 50s.  The first brother to go down was dead in 16 days from first symptoms.

Read about the younger people who have ‘recovered’ but become what are called ‘long haulers’ that have persisting difficulty with brain function, lungs and heart.

This virus is nothing to be taken casually.
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: Roderick on November 09, 2020, 01:30:41 PM
Right then lets look at the actual numbers of new cases in BC vs. my guesstimate.

By week:
my guesstimate was: 647           And the actual was: 647        Total actual cases: 9220
                                846                                         846                                  10066
                                1106                                       968                                  11034
                                1438                                       1520                                12544
                                1869                                       1827                                14381
                                2430                                       2768                                17149


This shows that the total number of cases is increasing at an increasing rate, ie. exponential.
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: big_fish on November 09, 2020, 01:59:33 PM
Right then lets look at the actual numbers of new cases in BC vs. my guesstimate.

By week:
my guesstimate was: 647           And the actual was: 647        Total actual cases: 9220
                                846                                         846                                  10066
                                1106                                       968                                  11034
                                1438                                       1520                                12544
                                1869                                       1827                                14381
                                2430                                       2768                                17149


This shows that the total number of cases is increasing at an increasing rate, ie. exponential.

huh? actually if you plot those numbers out, the graph is linear....
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: Roderick on November 09, 2020, 02:06:48 PM
Try plotting the total number of cases.  Not linear.
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: big_fish on November 09, 2020, 02:09:36 PM
That's what I did. It's linear.
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: Roderick on November 09, 2020, 02:14:52 PM
Linear would mean that the total number of cases is increasing by the same amount each week. 
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: big_fish on November 09, 2020, 02:18:11 PM
You need to look up the formula of exponential function.
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: Roderick on November 09, 2020, 02:32:59 PM
OK I'm going to give this one more try.

If we were adding the same number of cases per week it would be linear.
If we started at 10,000 and added 1000 cases per week it would go to 11,000, then 12,000, then 13,000 then 14,000

Plot that and you get a straight line. Linear


The actual numbers were more like 10,000, then 11,000 then 12,500 then 14,400 then 17,000

Plot that and the line curves up. Exponential
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: big_fish on November 09, 2020, 02:41:54 PM
Dude... That increase is not exponential...

You know what's exponential?

10,000
20,000
40,000
80,000
160,000

Get it?
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: Roderick on November 09, 2020, 02:44:22 PM
This is why the credit card companies make so much money, because people dont understand that compound interest is exponential. 


LOL i give up, believe what u want.
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: RalphH on November 09, 2020, 02:51:18 PM
This is why the credit card companies make so much money, because people dont understand that compound interest is exponential. 


LOL i give up, believe what u want.

actually it's compounded
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: big_fish on November 09, 2020, 02:58:54 PM
quit arguing with logic ralph. anything above linear is exponential lol
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: notmebud on November 09, 2020, 03:01:28 PM
 ;DThis is so much fun
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: Dave on November 09, 2020, 04:08:30 PM
We need Robert G back to settle this.
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: iblly on November 09, 2020, 05:34:10 PM
I do not miss Robert G
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: Fish Assassin on November 09, 2020, 06:03:25 PM
Wonder what God would say about Trump's loss ;) ;)
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: Roderick on November 09, 2020, 08:33:22 PM
I like this quote from the director general of the WHO about covid-19.


“It preys on inequality, division, denial, wishful thinking and wilful ignorance. We cannot close our eyes and hope it goes away. It pays no heed to political rhetoric or conspiracy theories. Our only hope is science, solutions and solidarity.”
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: big_fish on November 09, 2020, 09:44:57 PM
I like this quote from the director general of the WHO about covid-19.


“It preys on inequality, division, denial, wishful thinking and wilful ignorance. We cannot close our eyes and hope it goes away. It pays no heed to political rhetoric or conspiracy theories. Our only hope is science, solutions and solidarity.”

That doesn't change the fact that it's still not exponential lol... ;D
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: cutthroat22 on November 10, 2020, 12:29:20 PM
Wonder what God would say about Trump's loss ;) ;)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=blCx1GAaV20
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: big_fish on November 10, 2020, 02:53:34 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=blCx1GAaV20

I might be wrong, but i think I saw Robert g and aboater in the audience..... 😆
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: Roderick on November 12, 2020, 04:42:44 PM

"Latest modelling shows COVID-19 cases in B.C. doubling every 13 days"

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/latest-modelling-shows-covid-19-cases-in-b-c-doubling-every-13-days-1.5799829 (https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/latest-modelling-shows-covid-19-cases-in-b-c-doubling-every-13-days-1.5799829)


'nuf said
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: clarki on November 12, 2020, 08:07:37 PM
My dude, no, it’s not enuff.

While cases doubling every 13 days is indeed serious and very concerning, it still is not an exponential increase.

Doubling every 13 days describes a linear equation, not a exponential equation.
An equation with 2x operates much differently than an equation with x squared.
Doubling every 13 days will graph as straight line, albeit a line with a steep slope, but still a straight line.

We can debate linear vs exponential ‘til the cows come home, but I think we can both agree that the rate of infections is concerning and everyone needs to pay heed to Dr Bonnie.

‘Nuff said 😀




Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: bobby b on November 12, 2020, 10:02:32 PM
Um ,,, no ... the cows have come home and they say you are incorrect.

doubling every 13 days is exponential NOT Linear . It may have been linear for a time but we are well on track for and exponential rise in cases

 
lets say ... up to 300 cases was slow ( linear in form ) then uncontrolled spread leads to doubling every 13 days ...lets call that point day 1 of the exponential rise

day 1    = 300  (cases)
day 14  = 600
day 27  = 1200
day 40  = 2400
day 53  = 4800
day 66  = 9600
day 79  = 19200

do you see the log...

This is exponential growth with a base of 2

see the graph in figure 1 in this link ... doubling with equal periods of time

https://www.nsta.org/science-teacher/science-teacher-julyaugust-2020/exponential-growth-and-doubling-time

Nuff said?
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: clarki on November 12, 2020, 10:41:05 PM
The cows came home, and am wrong! To quote Barbie, “Math is hard” 😀

Doubling is indeed exponential. I had to dig deep into my high school class of Functions and Relations and a bit of googling, and your prompt of the base of 2, to be reminded of f(x)=2x

Thanks for not calling me a pompous dumb my friend (although I would deserve it!)
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: bobby b on November 12, 2020, 10:53:15 PM

Doubling every 13 days will graph as straight line, albeit a line with a steep slope, but still a straight line.


No ,,,,no it won't, have you tried it?

This answer would get you a zero on one of my exams btw....  ;).


4800                                                 4800
4500
4200
3900
3600
3300
3000
2700
2400                                    2400
2100
1800
1500
1200                         1200
900                     
600                600
300   day1       14.        27        40.       53.       66.       79
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: bobby b on November 12, 2020, 10:55:44 PM
LOL... no I would not call you pompous dumb. All is good
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: clarki on November 12, 2020, 11:04:38 PM
LOL... no I would not call you pompous dumb. All is good

Hah, my “dumb my buddy” autocorrected as  “dumb my friend” 😀

Yup, good thing I’m not in your math class, Mr. B!
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: clarki on November 12, 2020, 11:57:30 PM
Hah, my “dumb my buddy” autocorrected as  “dumb my friend” 😀

Yup, good thing I’m not in your math class, Mr. B!
Shoot, this software is too smart for me. I thought I would get clever and type it out as ampersand-s-s and it substituted “my buddy” this time.

This has not been my night!
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: RalphH on November 13, 2020, 06:58:43 AM
The cows came home, and am wrong! To quote Barbie, “Math is hard” 😀

Doubling is indeed exponential. I had to dig deep into my high school class of Functions and Relations and a bit of googling, and your prompt of the base of 2, to be reminded of f(x)=2x

Thanks for not calling me a pompous dumb my friend (although I would deserve it!)

what's x in this case?
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: RalphH on November 13, 2020, 10:23:33 AM
I think a lot of this question depends on where you set the start of the curve and the scale.

If you go to https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/a6f23959a8b14bfa989e3cda29297ded

there are 2 graphs at the bottom one for the Province and one for the Health Region (Fraser for me) which may be  determined by your IP. If you use the sliders at the tops of each graph and restrict the dates from Oct 13 to Nov 11 it doesn't look very much like a exponential curve. If you toggle to full screen (top right corner of the Health Region graph) it looks more like an exponential.

Consider too that the case doubling every 13 days is based on whatever model of virus spread PHO office is using and models are predictive but are not actual growth. If you look back from Nov 11 there will be no doubling every 13 days - ie for the Province Oct 26th is 306 news cases, Nov 5th is 564 which is somewhat short of doubling. That being said the model does say we are on a path of exponential growth.
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: Roderick on November 13, 2020, 04:32:41 PM
Yes it's definitely doubling faster now then it was in October.  Hopefully this partial lockdown will slow it down. If not, we can expect a full lockdown shortly because the number of ventilators don't double every couple of weeks. 
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: clarki on November 13, 2020, 11:36:54 PM
what's x in this case?
x would represent the number of 13 day intervals.
Day 1 f(0)
Day 14 f(1)
Day 27 f(2)



Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: Knnn on November 14, 2020, 07:32:12 AM
While cases are climbing it is reassuring to see that the case to fatality ratio, i.e. the number of deaths compared to cases, across the world is declining.

https://app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrIjoiMGVjYjhkMjMtMzhjMy00OWRkLWJlNWItNjM0NzI0NjhiNTlkIiwidCI6IjlkZWYwNTBlLTExMDUtNDk1ZC1iNzUzLWRhOGRiZTc5MGVmNyJ9

Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: RalphH on November 14, 2020, 07:33:32 AM
Well I thought that was where this was going but what is f(x)? The other confusion I see is that infection growth is mostly function of time rather than a function of our behaviour, population density and other factors. If I can use the analogy of credit card interest, the way to avoid the exponential growth of that debt is to pay off the balance or at least part of it or maybe reorganize debt! Everybody needs to adjust their behavior and there has to serious thought of punishing those who refuse.
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: Knnn on November 14, 2020, 09:57:04 AM
Well I thought that was where this was going but what is f(x)? The other confusion I see is that infection growth is mostly function of time rather than a function of our behaviour, population density and other factors. If I can use the analogy of credit card interest, the way to avoid the exponential growth of that debt is to pay off the balance or at least part of it or maybe reorganize debt! Everybody needs to adjust their behavior and there has to serious thought of punishing those who refuse.

I agree that infection rates are generally independent of population behaviors.  Reviewing past data shows that implementation of rigorous lock down measures has had little or no impact on the infection or death rates associated with this virus.  There appears to be a general opinion that the lock down measure in April/May caused the decline in infections, i.e. flattened the curve, when in fact infections and deaths were already falling and following a seasonal downward trend that is always associated with viruses of this nature.

It is difficult to get a grip on an argument that lock downs did not have a positive affect on controlling the virus, when there are many confounding factors such as societal, economic, dietary, ethnicity, latitude and seasonality, which all have significant impacts on outcomes, especially when comparing one or two countries.  However, if you look at the data on the following link you will see that numerous countries that have implemented very stringent lock down, have not fared any better than countries with far less stringent or no lock downs at all.

https://app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrIjoiMGVjYjhkMjMtMzhjMy00OWRkLWJlNWItNjM0NzI0NjhiNTlkIiwidCI6IjlkZWYwNTBlLTExMDUtNDk1ZC1iNzUzLWRhOGRiZTc5MGVmNyJ9 (https://app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrIjoiMGVjYjhkMjMtMzhjMy00OWRkLWJlNWItNjM0NzI0NjhiNTlkIiwidCI6IjlkZWYwNTBlLTExMDUtNDk1ZC1iNzUzLWRhOGRiZTc5MGVmNyJ9)

I'm not suggesting that we should ignore all guidance and have a free for all.  I agree that social distancing, hand washing and selective wearing of face masks are beneficial behaviors that will provide some protection to us older folks and there should be more consideration about how people are to be held accountable for their behavior.  However, the concern I have is determining how far the behavioral restrictions should go.  There is ever mounting evidence that the number of deaths due to COVID during this seasonal increase or "second wave" is far less than the deaths attributed to cancer, stroke, heart attack patients who have not received prompt attention due to the perceived need to protect our health care system and increased suicide rates. 

Therefore, before sever measures are implemented, such as a lock down, there has to be a full and balanced accounting of the relative immediate risks pose to society and societies ability to continue to function and protect its citizens from all forms of harm in the following years. I do not think I have seen any government offering this type of analysis and basing their decisions on a properly formulated cost benefit risk assessment.  Maybe they have behind the scenes, but I cannot find any indication of this logical process, which is rather frightening.








Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: RalphH on November 14, 2020, 04:34:58 PM
I agree that infection rates are generally independent of population behaviors.  Reviewing past data shows that implementation of rigorous lock down measures has had little or no impact on the infection or death rates associated with this virus. 

I don't believe that is the case - the spread of the virus is related to human behavior. It exploits human behavior to spread. The rate of spread can be controlled by controlling human behavior and other measures such as measuring masks, contract tracing and isolation of those potentially infected. As long as human populations apply the controls the rate of spread can be controlled and reduced.

In Canada's case lifting or relaxing those controls, normalizing of the presence of the virus and willfully ignoring recommended behavior changes have lead to the current rapid spread of the virus.
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: clarki on November 14, 2020, 11:31:53 PM
Well I thought that was where this was going but what is f(x)?
F(x)=bx is how exponential functions are expressed. The ‘f’ stands for function.
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: RalphH on November 15, 2020, 07:34:40 AM
F(x)=bx is how exponential functions are expressed. The ‘f’ stands for function.

yes I understand but what is it? For example for compound interest it's P(1+ r/n)^nt with P being the principal, r the interest rate, n the compounding rate and t the number time periods of growth. nt is the exponential x.

I realize none of us know but wanted to point that out and wonder what it is and who knows.

Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: wildmanyeah on November 15, 2020, 11:05:48 AM
https://www.mathsisfun.com/sets/function.html
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: DanL on November 15, 2020, 01:12:24 PM
The sort of exponential growth where something doubles every "x" units of time can be expressed by:

 Y= Y0 * e(k*X)

e = Euler's number ( ~2.718)
k = rate constant (see below)
X =  # of intervals (for this example, we'll use # of days)
Y0 = the starting value

For simplicity, lets say on day 0 there is exactly 1 covid case. Therefore Y0= 1 and we can conveniently exclude it from the remainder of the analysis

The rate constant where something doubles every single unit of time (ie every day) is = ln(2) ~= 0.693

If the doubling time interval is 13 days (suggested earlier in thread), then k = ln(2)/13 ~= 0.0533

Thus  Y = 2.718((0.0533)*X)

So starting from 1 case, if we want to predict how many cases there will be after 100 days (not quite 8 doublings which would be 28 = 256),   Y = 2.718((0.0533)*100) ~= 206 cases

As an aside, Y = X2 is not really an exponential function, it's quadratic. Y=2X is exponential, because the value of X is in the exponent (hence the name). You can plot them out and you'll see they have very different plot shapes
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: bobby b on November 15, 2020, 01:25:26 PM
Agreed^^^



more explanation here......

https://mathinsight.org/exponential_function
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: bobby b on November 15, 2020, 01:36:54 PM
The above would be a simple exponential graph.

The variables of population density, adherence to guidelines, and any other factors that would affect this measure can also be graphed using various methods of probability (or improbability ) math .....   thats where I start to glaze over... lol
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: Roderick on November 15, 2020, 02:25:42 PM
Just to add a further complication...

The cbc article i posted above actually shows that it's the number of new cases that are doubling every 13 days, not the total cases. 
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: IronNoggin on November 15, 2020, 02:45:23 PM

Three Lower Mainland schools closed for 2 weeks amid COVID-19 transmission

Three schools in the Fraser Health region have been told to close over concerns of COVID-19 transmission.

“A school outbreak is defined as a significant number of cases likely to have occurred onsite that extend beyond a classroom or administrative area such as a cohort, and exceptional measures are needed to control transmission,” reads a letter to parents posted to Tinney’s Twitter profile.

https://globalnews.ca/news/7463707/coronavirus-3-lower-mainland-schools-closed/
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: Knnn on November 15, 2020, 06:02:23 PM
I don't believe that is the case - the spread of the virus is related to human behavior.

Sorry RalghH, I misunderstood your post, I did not mean to put words in your mouth.  My apologies.
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: RalphH on November 15, 2020, 06:29:13 PM
some direct evidence that vigorous lock downs can be very effective:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-54654646

FYI - the company my wife works for has it's HQ in Melbourne.
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: IronNoggin on November 17, 2020, 03:11:55 PM
COVID-19 exposures: Multiple warning notices posted for B.C. grocery stores and pharmacies

Several COVID-19 exposure notices have been posted online for B.C. grocery stores in the past few days

https://bc.ctvnews.ca/covid-19-exposures-multiple-warning-notices-posted-for-b-c-grocery-stores-and-pharmacies-1.5192772
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: bobby b on November 17, 2020, 03:23:36 PM
Active cases of COVID-19 in British Columbia.

Oct 20     1808
Nov 03.   3098
Nov 16    6561
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: IronNoggin on November 19, 2020, 03:43:57 PM
B.C. to require masks in indoor, public places and extend ban on social gatherings province-wide

British Columbians must now wear masks in all indoor public places, officials announced, as part of sweeping new measures to crack down on the province’s second wave of COVID-19.

The province also extended the Nov 7. ban on social gatherings in the Fraser Health and Vancouver Coastal Health regions to December, and expanded it to the entire province.

Additionally, the province restricted community events, including faith-based gatherings, until Dec. 7.

Non-essential travel within the province is also banned.

https://globalnews.ca/news/7473178/bc-coronavirus-mandatory-masks-indoor-public-places/
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: RalphH on November 19, 2020, 05:55:03 PM
actually it looks like people are asked not to travel outside their communities for non-essential reasons. Discussion with a Public Health expert said this is aimed at discouraging non-essential travel outside health reasons. As in the spring it's on the vague side and open to personal interpretation. Maybe there will be more clarification tomorrow ..  ;)
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: wildmanyeah on November 19, 2020, 06:15:34 PM

Travel for mountain sports​
Ski and snowboard at your local mountain. For example, if you live in Vancouver, you should ski at Cypress, Grouse or Mt. Seymour.
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: clarki on November 19, 2020, 07:07:18 PM
As in the spring it's on the vague side and open to personal interpretation.

That wasn't your tune back in the spring, Ralph. You were very adamant what the definition of "local" was and anyone that saw it differently was selfish, or trying to re-engineer the English language.

"I don't see any of this as "subjective" or hard to understand." "justify their attempts to re-engineer the English language."  "some people take a common well defined and understood word and twist the meaning to suit their own selfish interests" "There isn't much that is subjective about the definition of local"
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: RalphH on November 19, 2020, 09:04:07 PM
That wasn't your tune back in the spring, Ralph. You were very adamant what the definition of "local" was and anyone that saw it differently was selfish, or trying to re-engineer the English language.

"I don't see any of this as "subjective" or hard to understand." "justify their attempts to re-engineer the English language."  "some people take a common well defined and understood word and twist the meaning to suit their own selfish interests" "There isn't much that is subjective about the definition of local"

Oh let's revisit your [incorrect] position on masks. You were just as wrong on what 'local' meant, you self interested weenie you!

JK

 ;D

PS next you'll be pitching herd immunity... or is that a herd mentality?


JK again. hee hee!
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: clarki on November 19, 2020, 09:21:27 PM
you self interest weenie you!
Guilty as charged!
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: RalphH on November 20, 2020, 09:04:59 AM
well there certainly has been a good % of people who have taken a "shady lawyer" approach to their own responsibility to the public well being. So now we have a new infections rate much larger than the first wave in the spring that are expected to quadruple(!) within the next 5 to 6 weeks. By default many people are taking a herd immunity approach to the well being of their family, friends, neighbors and associates.
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: Knnn on November 20, 2020, 10:30:40 AM
People should be aware that the fact we have more infections than the spring does not mean there are more COVID infections around or that a lack of social accountability has caused an increase in the number of infections.

The increase numbers and rates are largely due to a huge increase in the number of tests that are being carried out, using a methodology that is known to be subject to false positives and also identifies new infections in people who may have been infected 3-4 months previously.  Recent mass testing conducted in Liverpool by the UK army using a new more accurate test identified only 0.5-0.7% infections in asymptomatic patients, which was far lower than expected.

The disconnect between cases and COVID mortality is self evident in BC COVID data base, which tracks new cases and deaths:

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=BC+covid+data

Case numbers in the spring were approximately 1,500/day at the peak and now we are sitting above 4,000 day and continuing to increase.  Although case rates are now more than double the spring number, the number of deaths we are currently seeing is approximately half of the spring rate.

I'm not pointing this out as a way of justifying non-compliance with health orders, but to provide some perspective as to the potential for misinterpreting the current case numbers and over estimating the risk.


 
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: bobby b on November 20, 2020, 11:30:33 AM
^^^ crackpot logic ....

Just because Google exists does not make you an expert.

People should be aware that the fact we have more infections than the spring does not mean there are more COVID infections around or that a lack of social accountability has caused an increase in the number of infections.

So the high number of deaths in care homes has nothing to do with how easily this virus spreads?

Don't blame "lack of social accountability" ???   Testing killed 'em ?
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: bobby b on November 20, 2020, 11:37:02 AM
I might add that the lesser death rate has more to do with healthcare now having a better handle on treatment as opposed to when it first broke out.
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: CohoJake on November 20, 2020, 11:42:41 AM
I might add that the lesser death rate has more to do with healthcare now having a better handle on treatment as opposed to when it first broke out.
And as always, the death rate always lags behind the case rate by several weeks.  It can be a long, painful death.
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: Knnn on November 20, 2020, 02:18:40 PM
^^^ crackpot logic ....
Just because Google exists does not make you an expert.

Precisely where is the crackpot logic? 

Did you look at the data and come to a different conclusion, or are you throwing out a quick knee jerk response based on your search of Google, or do you have direct access to real world data? 

Google does not make anyone an expert, agreed.  However, but it does provide real world data, provided by the BC government, that anyone with a rudimentary education can interpret and come to reasonable conclusions.

Also do you have a reference to support your opinion, that the lesser death rate has more to do with healthcare now having a better handle on treatment as opposed to when it first broke out.

I agree that the death rate in hospitals is a lot less than it was previously, but not for the reason you are assuming.  Demographics indicate that more people in the 19-44 age group are dying and more deaths are occurring at home (this is based on UK data, but is probably similar here).  This is distinctly different from what happened during the pandemic, when most fatalities were in the over 65 age group and in hospital.   

Any thoughts as to why this is happening?

A reasonable and logical explanation could be the miss attribution of COVID deaths to people who are dying of heart attacks, strokes etc (at home) that also just happen to have COVID, but COVID may not have been the cause. 

A mutation that affects predominantly younger people could be a possible explanation, but it is unlikely and I have yet to see any evidence to support this speculation.
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: Roderick on November 20, 2020, 04:34:14 PM
Knnn

I'm trying to understand why you are trying to downplay the risks that this pandemic presents. The only conclusion I can come to is that you are upset because you (or someone close to you) had to delay or cancel a medical procedure because of the pandemic.  I could be wrong of course.

But a few more weeks at this growth rate and covid will completely overwhelm the health care system. 

Just as an anecdotal example, I read about a hospital in the US where over 900 hospital staff have tested positive in the last 2 weeks.  Without staff the hospital can't function obviously.
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: RalphH on November 20, 2020, 06:27:58 PM
http://www.bccdc.ca/Health-Info-Site/Documents/COVID_sitrep/BC_COVID-19_Situation_Report_Nov_13_2020.pdf

Page 4 has data and graphs on number of tests and positivity rates

it hasn't been updated since Nov 13th. For Fraser Health 1 st wave positive rates peaked in week 15 at about 6%  while in week 45 they were about 8%. Vancouver- Coast peaked at 6 to 7% in week 14 and is is at 3 to 4% in week 45.

It has to be noted that the concern should not be the specific % at any point  but the rate of growth in positive cases.
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: bobby b on November 20, 2020, 07:17:14 PM
I"ll save my breath... hate trying to reason with those who wear blinders.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/09/29/coronavirus-doctors-now-have-more-treatments-to-save-lives.html

https://nyulangone.org/news/study-helps-explain-declines-death-rates-covid-19

Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: RalphH on November 20, 2020, 08:15:10 PM
in the first wave in Canada the virus got into senior critical care Centres very early. That produced a relatively high mortality rate very quickly since people over 65 in poor health are at extreme risk. Since then measures taken to protect those specific environments has helped avoid a widespread repeat  though there are signs it is happening again.

Just trying to compare infection and mortality rates is something of an apples and oranges comparison.
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: Knnn on November 22, 2020, 07:30:26 PM
Knnn

I'm trying to understand why you are trying to downplay the risks that this pandemic presents. The only conclusion I can come to is that you are upset because you (or someone close to you) had to delay or cancel a medical procedure because of the pandemic.  I could be wrong of course.


Hey Roderick, that's a very reasonable question. 

Actually I'm not upset and fortunately no one I know has been severely impacted by COVID {touches wood}.  Although some of my mild frustration at the lack of scientific transparency or open discussion may be leaking through in some of my posts.

I am a scientist and I often have to assess the risks posed by contaminated land on human and ecological receptors.

Simply put, I see a huge increase in testing, a huge and ever growing number of cases, which would suggest a corresponding upswing in COVID mortality, if something is not done.  However, the numbers do not appear to support this assumption.  Death rates are far lower than during the epidemic and far fewer than would be expected if there was a strong correlation with infection rates.  I do not know if this is due to false positive test results, better protection of care homes, improved treatment methods or possible all the above or other factors.   However, what appears to be clear is that while the number of cases increases every day, mortality is not following the same pattern   As of today's date, overall crude case to fatality ratios across the world are trending down, even though case numbers are still climbing.  I do acknowledge, this is not the case in Canada where there has been an upturn in the case fatality ratio, but no where near the rate suggested by infection rates and the rate appears to be following a relatively normal seasonal trajectory. 

I agree with Ralph that trying to compare infections rates and mortality is challenging, however that is exactly what is being used to justify the control measures.

I also agree 100% that COVID is a very serious disease and that it poses very significant health risks to the elderly and those with poor metabolic health.  Therefore, the implementation of control measures to minimize these risks is absolutely essential.  However, what I have never seen is a risk assessment (presented by the media, health and/or provincial or federal authorities) that consider how excess moralities associated with COVID should be balanced against the adverse effects associated with the control measures. 

I am 100% behind social distancing, hand washing and masks, which have little adverse impact on society and should be rigorously applied.  However, there appears to be an ever building rhetoric that the only way to control the "exponential growth of this disease" is a total lock down.  However, I am concerned that such a lock down and closing businesses may be a step to far.  Looking at countries across the world that have implemented very rigorous lock downs (in totalitarian regimes) compared to countries that have been far more lax or not carried out any lock downs has not provided clear evidence that lock downs work. 

Every death due to COVID is sad and tragic, however, there are also very sever consequences associated with delayed cancer, heart and stroke treatment, domestic abuse, suicide and economic down turns that may severely hinder a country''s ability to look after it citizens for many years to come.  I find it worrying that this fine balance is not acknowledged or discussed, which is why I raise the topic.


Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: Roderick on November 23, 2020, 04:20:14 PM
Knnn

I'm glad to hear that you and yours remain untouched by the pandemic. 

I understand that you want the cost benefit analysis of lockdown before any decisions are made, but I have the feeling we wont know the true cost of action or lack thereof for many years to come. We can't afford to wait for economists and scientists to produce an assessment before we do something. Aside from the purely economic costs such as shuttered businesses, much of the cost is in intangibles.  It's impossible to put a number on the social costs like the increase in overdoses, suicides, divorces, etc.  The costs of not having a lockdown, like elders not being there to teach their grandchildren, are even more tenuous. 

To me it seems obvious that lockdowns work.  Its just another name for quarantine, which has been the gold standard in disease control for millennia.  The severe lockdown in Wuhan virtually eliminated the disease in that area within a few weeks. 

The death rate is low here for many reasons, but it's primarily due to socially isolating the most at risk and hospitalizing the cases that would otherwise be fatal.  But that will all change if the number of severe cases increases to the point where there are no longer enough hospital beds and staff.  People that would survive with treatment will end up dying in the waiting room.

We, all of us, are obviously wiling to accept the price of the few people that die even with treatment or we would all be locked in to our homes and all businesses and schools closed, but allowing the health care system to become overwhelmed is where I draw that very fine line. 
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: Knnn on November 25, 2020, 04:57:43 PM
Finally some good news.

Two (2) recent clinic trails have clearly demonstrated the efficacy of Vitamin D to moderate the adverse impacts of COVID-19.  These represent the first trials that have established a causal linkage between Vitamin D and COVID rather than the correlational or epidemiological relationships that numerous previous studies have suggested. 

The previous (numerous) studies indicted that COVID-19 patients are typically low in Vitamin D, suggesting that this vitamin is necessary to fight of the infection, or that people who already have low vitamin D levels are more likely to be infected and/or suffer worse symptoms (this partially explains why certain ethnic minorities suffer higher infection and mortality rates, such as the Somali population in Sweden).

However, we now have parallel, randomized, blind and controlled clinical trials that demonstrate high vitamin D levels will reduce symptoms and reduce infection periods.  The trial conducted in a Spanish hospital demonstrated that if hospitalized COVID patients are given high doses of vitamin D, only 2% will end up in ICU.  This is compared to 50% of patients who did not receive vitamin D.  In addition there were no deaths in the 50 patients given Vitamin D compared to 2 deaths out of the 25 Patients who did not receive the vitamin.

The study is explained very clearly and in greater detail by Dr. John Campbell here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V8Ks9fUh2k8&t=1421s

Link to the original paper:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7456194/

The second study was conducted in India using over the counter Vitamin D tablets.  This trial shows that if patients who are admitted to hospital with COVID are given high doses of Vitamin D, they clear the virus from the system a lot faster than patients who do not receive Vitamin D and are less likely to suffer from blood clotting.

Again the study is explained in greater detail here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7H2c0Zm6PFw

Link to the original paper:
https://pmj.bmj.com/content/early/2020/11/12/postgradmedj-2020-139065

Like the doctor, I am bewildered as to why this information has not been picked up by the media and there has been no change in National or Provincial health policy or recommendations.

These trials and all the epidemiology represent a huge evidence base that clearly demonstrates that Vitamin D reduces COVID infection duration, severity of outcome and even mortality.  Vitamin D is an extremely cheap compound to manufacture, is shelf stable, is readily available and there should be little problem supplying or distributing it to the entire population of Canada.   Considering that prophylactic treatment with Vitamin D is likely to significantly diminish the risk of COVID overloading our medial system, and in particular ICU, why are we not hearing more about it?  I don't believe in conspiracy theories, but this has me baffled. 

The way forward now appears to be clear; get everyone to take Vitamin D in the morning before we step outside with our masks on or lock down the province/country and destroy our economy.  OK; that is more than a little facetious, however it does make the point. 


Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: Roderick on November 26, 2020, 12:56:03 PM
And one of the best natural sources of vitamin D is... wait for it... salmon and trout.  ;D
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: clarki on November 26, 2020, 02:15:56 PM
And from exposure to sunlight...

We live in a climate where it rains for 13 months of the year, and if it's not outright cloudy, it's overcast instead.

We're screwed :)
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: Rodney on November 26, 2020, 02:55:54 PM
So basically when this is over, there'll only be breatharians left on this planet. Got it. :D
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: dobrolub on November 26, 2020, 03:37:46 PM
So basically when this is over, there'll only be breatharians left on this planet. Got it. :D
CO2 -> Photosynthesis -> O2 . No light -> No Oxygen -> No breatharians either.
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: Knnn on November 27, 2020, 04:49:59 PM
An excellent white paper on the lack of effectiveness of lock down and alternative strategies:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1LtNKwJQKdkmILwd9nJWmR4UOfLi7E5yj/view

Lancet paper on country level assessment of lock down on health outcomes.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/eclinm/article/PIIS2589-5370(20)30208-X/fulltext

An informative general discussion on the effectiveness of crackdowns and its downsides.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8x6eSZA90M4
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: Roderick on November 28, 2020, 10:14:27 PM
Meanwhile both the number of active cases and the total number of cases in BC had doubled in the last 26 days, and the 7 day average of new cases has doubled in 21 days. 

This means the growth rate has actually slowed down since early November... I wonder why?
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: Knnn on December 18, 2020, 02:48:42 PM
I wonder why we are not seeing more about Ivermectin in the news or from our health care professionals?

Numerous, not just 1 or 2, but many clinical trials have clearly established that this anti-parasitic and antiviral drug is very effective in prophylaxis AND treatment of COVID-19.  Even country wide use of this drug has demonstrated its prophylactic effectiveness in large population groups in South America.

It would appear to be a game changer, and has an established history of use and known toxicity, with a good safety profile.  Perhaps it is not being considered because it is an established unlicensed drug that no one can make any money on?  Too paranoid...probably.

Coles notes can be found here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLWQtT7dHGE

Are very passionate speech here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tq8SXOBy-4w


Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: CohoJake on December 18, 2020, 05:15:27 PM
I wonder why we are not seeing more about Ivermectin in the news or from our health care professionals?

Numerous, not just 1 or 2, but many clinical trials have clearly established that this anti-parasitic and antiviral drug is very effective in prophylaxis AND treatment of COVID-19.  Even country wide use of this drug has demonstrated its prophylactic effectiveness in large population groups in South America.

It would appear to be a game changer, and has an established history of use and known toxicity, with a good safety profile.  Perhaps it is not being considered because it is an established unlicensed drug that no one can make any money on?  Too paranoid...probably.

Coles notes can be found here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLWQtT7dHGE

Are very passionate speech here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tq8SXOBy-4w

Here's an analysis of that drug from August:

https://www.medpagetoday.com/special-reports/exclusives/88310 (https://www.medpagetoday.com/special-reports/exclusives/88310)

From that article:

The Next HCQ?

Parallels have been drawn with ivermectin and HCQ: Both reduced viral load in vitro and produced a signal that led to their being prescribed under compassionate use, said Zeno Bisoffi, MD, PhD, of the University of Verona in Italy.

"There were some results from observational studies claiming that [hydroxychloroquine] worked, but in fact they were small studies with very heavy methodological flaws," Bisoffi told MedPage Today. "Nevertheless, they were cited everywhere, so most clinicians around the world were using hydroxychloroquine with no evidence."

"This is a mistake we want to avoid with ivermectin," Bisoffi said.

Both drugs were also caught up in the notorious Surgisphere Corp. scandal. In late May, flawed data from the shadowy company were used in a since-retracted Lancet study that found HCQ was associated with an increased risk of death and ventricular arrhythmias.

A lesser-known preprint study of 169 hospitals around the world also used Surgisphere data to demonstrate that ivermectin reduced the need for mechanical ventilation and death. As with the HCQ study, the scientific community identified discrepancies in Surgisphere's ivermectin data, and the paper was withdrawn -- but not before it was downloaded more than 15,000 times.



Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: Knnn on December 19, 2020, 04:22:06 PM
CohoJake,

If you watch the video, you will see why there are huge differences between ivermectin and HCQ and why many many health care professionals are asking health authorities to revisit that earlier August assessment.  Since then there have been many clinical trials, not observational studies.
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: CohoJake on December 21, 2020, 11:13:35 AM
CohoJake,

If you watch the video, you will see why there are huge differences between ivermectin and HCQ and why many many health care professionals are asking health authorities to revisit that earlier August assessment.  Since then there have been many clinical trials, not observational studies.
Do you have links to any completed studies?  Or are they all still in progress?
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: fishtruck on December 21, 2020, 02:30:28 PM
Not trying to be an A$$hat,just an observation. When did we start relying on YouTube videos as sound science? or even somewhat credible science?
I've always thought that if you wanted any real facts, periodicals and scientific journals were the go to source
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: Knnn on December 22, 2020, 09:41:24 AM
Not trying to be an A$$hat,just an observation. When did we start relying on YouTube videos as sound science? or even somewhat credible science?
I've always thought that if you wanted any real facts, periodicals and scientific journals were the go to source

As a general rule I would agree with you, however there are numerous sources of information on Youtube provided by suitably qualified individuals, who provide their interpretation of pre-print studies or peer reviewed technical papers that you may not be aware of or have access to.  If you have a scientific training or technical background, it is relatively easy to spot the legit sources of information and it is a shame to ignore them, just because they use YouTube to disseminate interesting and useful information.  For example, if you watch the fist link I provided, you will see that a medical doctor (by no means an expert, but with enough training to read and understand technical documentation)  provides at least three (3) references for you to follow up if you wish to verify his interpretation, as all good scientists do.
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: IronNoggin on December 28, 2020, 10:50:48 AM
Dammit!!

B.C.’s first case of more contagious U.K. COVID-19 strain found in Island Health

https://nanaimonewsnow.com/2020/12/27/b-c-s-first-case-of-more-contagious-u-k-covid-19-strain-found-in-island-health/
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: RalphH on December 28, 2020, 11:13:35 AM
Dammit!!

B.C.’s first case of more contagious U.K. COVID-19 strain found in Island Health

https://nanaimonewsnow.com/2020/12/27/b-c-s-first-case-of-more-contagious-u-k-covid-19-strain-found-in-island-health/

pretty much inevitable. News is now out that this new variant has been tracked in the UK since September. There no evidence it has producing greater morbidity once it has been contracted. 
Title: Re: A return to Lock down for Coastal and Fraser Health Regions
Post by: Electroman on December 28, 2020, 03:02:17 PM
pretty much inevitable. News is now out that this new variant has been tracked in the UK since September. There no evidence it has producing greater morbidity once it has been contracted.

No greater mortality but a much more contagious.